User talk:Claytonisabelle22

Hello, Claytonisabelle22, and

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:26, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Your edit was reverted again. It is not well written or well placed. Please discuss changes on the talk page. See

Please see above and

WP:CITE. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 02:23, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 02:23, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 14:54, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you need help formatting your contribution to gelato (e.g. history of it). I think you have good information there but it just needs to be reworked into the same style/tone as the rest of the article, as well as having some more robust sourcing. It's important that you don't just readd the same content without cleaning it up some more first though. 107.77.203.144 (talk) 16:53, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I wanted to explain why the content kept getting reverted. Here's what you added to the page:

Italians brought gelato to us. They were not very good with refrigeration, so they would make small batches by hand because they could not store it very well. They did not have factories to produce the gelato, so that is why it was handmade. Up until the twentieth century, making gelato was a challenge because of the lack of refrigeration. The architect, Bernardo Buontalenti, is credited with the egg cream in gelato. The people that made it famous were Francesco Redi and Lorenzo Magalotti because they praised the ingredients, and this caused gelato eventually start showing up on restaurant menus. The major thing that helped gelato get onto the streets was the invention of artificial ice. After artificial ice, gelato started to become very popular. To make gelato easier to carry on the streets, an Italian invented the cone. Gelato was originally made sweet with a sugar syrup and natural flavors, such as chocolates, nuts, or fresh fruits. The sugar syrup that was used was is known as simple syrup today. The use of such ingredients then led to the invention of sorbetto.

• The first issue with this is that the content was placed at the top of the page, which posed a formatting issue since it was meant to be a history section, which should go in the main body of the article rather than the lead.

• The second is that this is entirely unsourced. All content needs to be backed up with a reliable source that explicitly states the given claims.

• A third issue is the tone of the content. It's very casual in tone and used wording like "us", rather than use the third person that Wikipedia prefers. There's some decent information here, but it needs to be re-written to fit Wikipedia's more formal style. I'm going to clean this up a little and incorporate content that's already in the article. Here's what I came up with:

The precursor of gelato and frozen desserts such as

Francesco Procopio dei Coltelli who in the late 1600s opened his “Café Procope” in Paris and introduced gelato at his café, earning notability first in Paris and then in the rest of Europe.^[4] Thanks to his gelato, Procopio not only obtained French citizenship, but also got an exclusive royal licence issued by the Sun King Louis XIV, making him at the time the sole producer of the frozen dessert in the kingdom.^[5] Descriptions of the dessert during this time can be found in writings by Francesco Redi and Lorenzo Magalotti.^{[citation needed]} Gelato was originally made with sugar syrup and natural flavors, such as chocolates, nuts, or fresh fruits. The use of such ingredients then led to the invention of sorbetto.^{[citation needed}

]

During this time gelato was made in small batches by hand, as the lack of access to refrigeration made it difficult to store.^[citation needed] Refrigeration would pose an issue for gelato and food preservation in general until the 20th century, when advances in technology made it possible to store larger amounts of food products.^{[citation needed]} The creation of artificial ice also helped to popularize the dessert, as would the creation of the cone, which made it easier for consumers to carry gelato on the streets.^{[citation needed]}

This needs a lot of sourcing to back up the claims, as marked above.

• Finally, this was re-added several times after the material was removed. If content is challenged and removed, it's very important that you not re-add the material until all of the concerns have been resolved. It doesn't matter if another person in the class restores it, the content can still be removed and challenged and it's very important to resolve the concerns and talk things out on the article's talk page. Re-adding the content without discussing and resolving the issues can actually have the opposite of the desired effect, as it is seen as edit warring and can actually lead to a block from editing if it were to continue.

I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any questions. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:53, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]